stuart in mn
stuart in mn PowerDork
5/12/15 8:19 p.m.

I read about this in the local newspaper the other day:

http://www.startribune.com/plasti-dip-of-blaine-accuses-rust-oleum-of-stealing-trade-secrets/303218331/

Plasti Dip International, the Blaine-based maker of tool coatings that has grown quickly since 2010 and built a global social media ­following, is suing the maker of Rust-Oleum over its spray-on rubberized coating that came out last year.

Plasti Dip says Rust-Oleum, owned by huge RPM International, an Ohio-based coatings firm, made its rival “FlexiDip” product based on trade secrets it obtained from Plasti Dip when the two firms discussed a joint venture in 2013.

They say Rust-Oleum’s FlexiDip product violates patents Plasti Dip founder Robert Haasl registered in the 1970s and 1980s. Plasti Dip started in 1972 by making rubberized, protective coating that people could apply to hand tools for improved grip.

Plasti Dip struggled for decades as a so-so performer of a product used largely by professional and back yard mechanics to coat tools to give them a better grip. But in 2010, sales climbed 30 percent as new groups of customers, including auto customizers and craft do-it-yourselfers, latched on to Plasti Dip in the spray can.

Customers started as coating chrome car wheels and then covering entire vehicles. The product could be peeled off with no damage to the wheel or car body. Plasti Dip responded by cranking out more colors, going from six to 34 since 2009 and creating a way for people to mix their own colors.

Home decorators, professional and amateur, became the newest buyers for it. The online magazine Apartment Therapy last year featured holiday ideas for Plasti Dip, including treating pine cones and dipping wine goblets.

As the market exploded for Plasti Dip, Rust-Oleum, whose cornerstone coating protects against rust, approached the company in 2013.

“We discussed a wide range of positive business relationships,” Scott Haasl, Plasti Dip’s president and son of the founder, said last week. “We have a history.”

The two had battled for shelf space for protective coatings among hardware retailers and distributors going back 20 years.

RPM is far larger, with about $4 billion in annual sales, compared with Plasti Dip’s $40 ­million last year.

According to the Plasti Dip lawsuit, the companies entered into nondisclosure and ­confidentiality agreements in mid-2013 under which they shared trade-secret information and worked on a “joint-label” product that would include Plasti Dip’s “proprietary chemical manufacturing process.”

However in late 2013, Rust-Oleum quietly applied for trademarks on FlexiDip and Peel Coat, its own dips. Rust-Oleum started selling the products last year, to the surprise of Plasti Dip executives.

Haasl said Plasti Dip shared with Rust-Oleum how to take the coating from a concentrate to a state that can be used in an aerosol can. But Haasl didn’t give up the “secret source,” the actual chemical ingredients.

“Divulging our complete product formulation never occurred,” he said.

Plasti Dip wants a federal judge to find Rust-Oleum in violation of a nondisclosure agreement, guilty of stealing trade secrets, violating its trademark and using Plasti Dip’s proprietary ­process in FlexiDip and Peel Coat.

Moreover, Plasti Dip asserts that Rust-Oleum earlier this year interfered with Plasti Dip’s contract with a big distributor, Florida-based DipYourCar.com, by trying to get the owner to also peddle Rust-Oleum’s competitive products. Plasti Dip also seeks more than $75,000 in damages on each of the six counts it alleges, including unjust enrichment, or profiting from stolen proprietary information.

Rust-Oleum has yet to respond to the April lawsuit before U.S. ­District Judge John Tunheim, though it is expected to later this month. RPM and its lawyers declined to comment last week.

In a ruling last December in a narrower-scope trademark-infringement suit brought by Plasti Dip, Tunheim declined to bar sales of the Rust-Oleum products. “The court finds there is little likelihood of confusion between the two products,” the judge said.

Meanwhile, consumers are comparing Plasti Dip and FlexiDip on YouTube videos and enthusiast websites.

In the interview, Haasl said business is good despite what he considers unfair competition from Rust-Oleum.

Plasti Dip employs 55 people at its Blaine plant and through a Milwaukee distributor. However, several temporary workers in Blaine were let go this year as sales growth slowed.

Sales have been growing at a double-digit pace for more than five years. The Blaine plant turns out more than 100,000 gallons of dip a month.

drummerfromdefleopard
drummerfromdefleopard GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
5/12/15 8:35 p.m.

I wish them the best of luck in taking on big spray paint, but they likely have the judges and politicians on their payroll. Better not let them know about Eastwood's version as well.

Flight Service
Flight Service MegaDork
5/12/15 8:41 p.m.

huh

alfadriver
alfadriver UltimaDork
5/13/15 6:37 a.m.

A patent in 1989 would have expired by now.

spitfirebill
spitfirebill PowerDork
5/13/15 7:06 a.m.
alfadriver wrote: A patent in 1989 would have expired by now.

It doesn't say so, but I assumed the aerosol was protected by a later patent.

alfadriver
alfadriver UltimaDork
5/13/15 7:28 a.m.
spitfirebill wrote:
alfadriver wrote: A patent in 1989 would have expired by now.
It doesn't say so, but I assumed the aerosol was protected by a later patent.

No, it doesn't say that, but it does say this-

They say Rust-Oleum’s FlexiDip product violates patents Plasti Dip founder Robert Haasl registered in the 1970s and 1980s.

So if it's violating patents from the 70's and 80's, big deal.

Appleseed
Appleseed MegaDork
5/13/15 7:47 a.m.

I think the big deal is the non-disclosure agreenent from 2013.

pinchvalve
pinchvalve GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
5/13/15 7:49 a.m.

There are different kinds of patents that last different periods of time, but I don't think any last more than 40 years.

SyntheticBlinkerFluid
SyntheticBlinkerFluid UltimaDork
5/13/15 8:10 a.m.

It sounds like Plasti Dip made the mistake if giving the bigger company it's trade secrets. That's not the first time that's happened.

Ashyukun
Ashyukun GRM+ Memberand Dork
5/13/15 9:16 a.m.
pinchvalve wrote: There are different kinds of patents that last different periods of time, but I don't think any last more than 40 years.

They probably revised the patent by adding 'sold on the internet' to the end of them so they would once again be 'novel and unique'. Or maybe they just copyrighted the formula- then they'd NEVER have to worry about it expiring.

spitfirebill
spitfirebill PowerDork
5/13/15 9:41 a.m.

You can also get a use patent. An old product with a new use can be patented. My old boss did it.

Dr. Hess
Dr. Hess MegaDork
5/13/15 9:47 a.m.

So, where are our IP lawyers? I know you're out there.

Paul_VR6
Paul_VR6 HalfDork
5/13/15 10:03 a.m.
Appleseed wrote: I think the big deal is the non-disclosure agreenent from 2013.

Bingo. There may be things well beyond the old patents that PlastiDip wanted to keep trade-secret. If Rustoleum used those to their advantage with a proper NDA in place this could get interesting.

Ashyukun
Ashyukun GRM+ Memberand Dork
5/13/15 11:02 a.m.
Paul_VR6 wrote:
Appleseed wrote: I think the big deal is the non-disclosure agreenent from 2013.
Bingo. There may be things well beyond the old patents that PlastiDip wanted to keep trade-secret. If Rustoleum used those to their advantage with a proper NDA in place this could get interesting.

Yup... from what little I know about IP/trade secret/patent law, keeping a protected trade secret would be the smartest way to go if they had a truly unique/novel formula for their product. Violating an NDA that included access to that trade secret would be pretty difficult to argue didn't mean that the wronged company deserved some pretty hefty compensation. It's possible Rustoleum is trying to take a page from the RIAA/MPAA playbook and figuring that they'll force a default 'win' for themselves by making fighting it more costly than PlastiDip can afford.

Unless there's something damning missing from the current info, it does sound like Rustoleum really tried to screw them over. Which is rather disappointing since I've generally liked their products in the past but don't want to support that kind of corporate dickery.

Out of curiosity, has anyone used both PlastiDip and Rustoleum's knock-off to be able to say how close they are?

slantvaliant
slantvaliant SuperDork
5/13/15 12:00 p.m.

I suspect Rustoleum has this covered.

spitfirebill
spitfirebill PowerDork
5/13/15 12:08 p.m.

Or they just feel they can just out lawyer the small guys.

Woody
Woody GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
5/13/15 2:07 p.m.

DipE36 M3s...

Paul_VR6
Paul_VR6 Dork
5/13/15 8:39 p.m.
spitfirebill wrote: Or they just feel they can just out lawyer the small guys.

Highly likely.

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
ILixukqTRcEBkR08wMuzzCzQsjpYYcUuCQrwrayPEna6DYRbVb0B2mtckXzbIoNR